Literature DB >> 20174939

A comparison of early learning curves for complex bimanual coordination with open, laparoscopic, and flexible endoscopic instrumentation.

Georg O Spaun1, Bin Zheng, Daniel V Martinec, Brittany N Arnold, Lee L Swanström.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study takes an initial step towards understanding the learning process of flexible endoscopic surgery. Bimanual coordination learning curves were contrasted between three different surgical paradigms. We hypothesized that use of an open or laparoscopic paradigm would result in better performance and a shorter learning process (reaching a learning plateau earlier) than an endoscopic paradigm.
METHODS: Our model required seven subjects to perform identical bimanual coordination tasks with three different tools (a dual-channel endoscope with graspers, laparoscopic Maryland graspers, and straight hemostats for open surgery). The task required subjects to coordinate two instruments in order to perform a series of standardized maneuvers. Performance was measured by movement speed and accuracy. The learning process was broken down into three distinct phases: the practice phase, the short-term retention phase, and the long-term retention phase. The learning curves of four surgical novices for 33 tasks with each device were compared with the performance of three surgeons.
RESULTS: Overall performance speed was significantly faster using open or laparoscopic tools than endoscopy for all groups (open 13 ± 1 s; lap 28 ± 3 s; endo 202 ± 82 s; P < 0.001). The difference between open and laparoscopy was not significant (P = 0.149). There was no significant difference (P = 0.434) in accuracy (number of ring drops) between any of the devices. Novices performed significantly slower than the expert in the endoscopy task (P = 0.010). Their performance improved with practice (P = 0.005) but they failed to reach the level of the expert after the practice phase (novices: 202.3 ± 23.4 s versus expert: 89.0 ± 34 s, P = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: Bimanual coordination tasks have shortest performance time and are easiest to learn using an open surgery paradigm. Performance times and the learning process take longer for the laparoscopic paradigm and significantly longer for the endoscopic paradigm.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20174939     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-010-0913-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  14 in total

1.  The tail of the learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  A J Voitk; S G Tsao; S Ignatius
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.565

2.  Perceptions of gastroenterology fellows regarding ERCP competency and training.

Authors:  Thomas Kowalski; Thirumaleshwar Kanchana; Surakit Pungpapong
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 3.  Robotics and ergonomics.

Authors:  Nicholas Stylopoulos; David Rattner
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.741

4.  [Learning curve--calculation and value in laparoscopic surgery].

Authors:  P Buchmann; S Dinçler
Journal:  Ther Umsch       Date:  2005-02

Review 5.  Robotic surgery.

Authors:  Dmitry Oleynikov
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.741

6.  Quantitative assessment of procedural competence. A prospective study of training in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  P S Jowell; J Baillie; M S Branch; J Affronti; C L Browning; B P Bute
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1996-12-15       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A prospective analysis of 100 initial patients.

Authors:  J H Peters; E C Ellison; J T Innes; J L Liss; K E Nichols; J M Lomano; S R Roby; M E Front; L C Carey
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Bimanual coordination in natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: comparing the conventional dual-channel endoscope, the R-Scope, and a novel direct-drive system.

Authors:  Georg O Spaun; Bin Zheng; Danny V Martinec; Maria A Cassera; Christy M Dunst; Lee L Swanström
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 9.427

9.  The first 1000 cases of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in the UK: evidence of multiple 'learning curves'.

Authors:  Christopher G Eden; Mischel G Neill; Mark W Louie-Johnsun
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2008-11-20       Impact factor: 5.588

10.  Training surgeons in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  G C Vitale; C M Zavaleta; D S Vitale; J C Binford; T C Tran; G M Larson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-12-07       Impact factor: 3.453

View more
  3 in total

1.  Quantifying mental workloads of surgeons performing natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) procedures.

Authors:  Bin Zheng; Erwin Rieder; Maria A Cassera; Danny V Martinec; Gyusung Lee; O Neely M Panton; Adrian Park; Lee L Swanström
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-11-04       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Higher physical workload risks with NOTES versus laparoscopy: a quantitative ergonomic assessment.

Authors:  Gyusung Lee; Erica Sutton; Tameka Clanton; Adrian Park
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Optimizing laparoscopic training efficacy by 'deconstruction into key steps': a randomized controlled trial with novice medical students.

Authors:  A Widder; J Backhaus; A Wierlemann; I Hering; S Flemming; M Hankir; C-T Germer; A Wiegering; J F Lock; S König; F Seyfried
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 3.453

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.